LOL at the protestors

hahahaha…. continuing my laughter from my previous post. it amused me so much to see those who are against the article 11 forum… which is a forum on freedom of religion under the federal constitution and NOT about the IFC. it amused me so much because of the reasons they gave, especially that part on challenging and weakening islam. if you feel a mere forum can weaken your faith/religion, i really don’t know how you live your faith. if everytime a small matter pop up and you cried that you need to ‘defend your faith’, i really don’t know how you live your faith.

so come on, protest more. the more people protest,the more fun i will have laughing at them. the more it will tell on them.

ok, right now, i am going to do a CnP job… copied some articles/letters from elsewhere (not all but part) and paste here. don’t forget to click on the link to read it in full.

Why should we be cowed by some hooligans who refuse to listen before they protest! I don’t know much about religion, but I’m sure this is not the type of Islam Hadhari that the PM is promoting.It’s the same story. Whenever minorities want to discuss their feelings about the impact of Islam on their lives, blackmail through threat of violence always works and the government is the same always, bowing to the threat rather than doing what is right.
When I read the Star this morning: “Article 11 forums to discuss inter-faith issues must stop immediately because they are deemed to cause tension in our multi-religious society, Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi said,” I felt nothing but utter despair.

It appears to me that the prime minister, who is supposed to be impartial and represent Malaysians from all walks of life, colour, creed and belief, has given in to mob pressure and have now made known which side he is on. When he became PM, he swore to uphold the Constitution and the Article 11 [not interfaith council] forum was about the constitution. By stating his stand, he has firmly also made it known he has reneged on the oath.

from ‘abdullah’s gag order another letdown‘
———-

Let’s take a look at public gatherings. The law dictates that any group ofmore than a certain number needs a police permit to organise a public event.If you do not have a permit and break the law, adequate punishment should follow, regardless of who you are.

There were two clear exceptions to this rule recently, and both were”tolerated by the police force.” Both involved protests against anotherunpopular but legal gathering for a private but open meeting regardingArticle 11 and the freedom of religion in Malaysia. But, not so long ago, another protest at the KLCC against the rise of the price of petrol and
electricity were brutally stopped with blood being spilled. It was called an illegal gathering. That matter is now being investigated by Suhakam

from ‘double standard in law enforcement‘  

from a commenter, ksn, in jeff ooi’s screenshot.———

The Article 11 initiative is in no way connected with the Interfaith Commission initiative. They are separate initiatives, with very different objectives. Unfortunately, unscrupulous parties have twisted this state of affairs and presented the objectives of both initiatives as not only being highly objectionable but also as being connected.

The Article 11 initiative is, however, aimed at creating awareness of the Federal Constitution, the guarantees provided therein and the concept of rule of law against increasing assertions that Malaysia is – in law – an Islamic State. In presenting the Federal Constitution, the initiative has at no point sought to question the status of Islam as the official religion of Malaysia – it is what the Constitution says, after all. Neither has the initiative sought to challenge or attack the administration of Islamic Law nor the esteemed position of the Malay Rulers.

In view of this, it is grossly unreasonable for various parties to have characterised Article 11 as having challenged the status of Islam as the official religion and the status quo. Article 11 has not done so, in fact, it has championed the law including the declaration of Islam as the official religion of the Federation. Conversely, it is its detractors who have, through distortion and by preying on religious and racial sensitivities, sought to challenge the status quo. It is this very process of mixing religion, politics and the rule of law resulting in the ensuing confusion that Article 11 has been cautioning against. Regrettably, this process is gaining ground.

from letter of maili imitiaz sarwar, president of HAKAM (malaysia human rights society)